Generally I don't care what sports players make or actors or pretty much anyone makes, but I do find it annoying that the media tends to use their salaries as a way of saying one is better than the other. Which is not necessarily the case. Say a guy in Kansas City is the best player in baseball. Because he doesn't play in a larger market he will not get asnuch as a lesser player in New York for example.
shareWe should know how ridiculously overpaid they are. This needs to end while people live in poverty. There are limited resources available and these jobs are not worth it. I can't think of any actor or athlete who deserves over half a million a year.
shareI agree that none of them deserve even 250 thousand a year let alone 30 million more for one film. But I think the media compounds the problem by presenting that these actors or athletes are only being paid a percentage of the overall profits so in fact they are underpaid is such a terrible argument.
shareOur whole system is out of whack.
shareThey all deserve it, because that is the kind of revenue their industry generates, and they were able to negotiate their piece of pie based on their value.
Is it important to society? No of course not, but sports and entertainment generate what they generate and we don’t live in a utopia.
It's an inflated value. I would tax their salaries down to a rate which is more in reason with the average income.
http://www.1920-30.com/movies/movie-star-salaries.html#google_vignette
That’s a baseball specific problem. Because there is no hard cap, bigger cities can spend more, and small markets can’t compete, making them major league farm teams. That best player will leave and go to New York or Boston when his first contract is up.
Meanwhile the NFL has it figured out. Kansas City just happens to draft a generational talent at quarterback, and they could actually keep him and dominate the league, which is literally happening right now.